Has the Minister any intention of making alterations in the embargo in regard to the Revenue Commissioners where there are 518 staff short at a time when under assessment of £3,500 million is due in tax? In view of that, and the great loss to the Exchequer, has the Minister any plans to increase the staffing in the Revenue Commissioners?

No. Previously the Government placed a levy on other Departments so as to get more than 100 staff for the Revenue. I am glad the Deputy has raised this matter, because it is worthy of consideration. There are approximately 30,000 non-industrial civil servants in the various Departments of State. Some 7,000 of them are employed in the Revenue Commissioners. Virtually one quarter of the total non-industrial civil servants are employed in one form or another in the collection of revenue. That is a considerable proportion by any standards and by the standards of any service. What is most important is to ensure that the staff within that large grouping are deployed as efficiently and effectively as possible.

With regard to the reference to £3,500 million of tax assessments I am glad the Deputy has raised that also. This is a hoary old chestnut that is dragged up from time to time and, without wishing to be contentious, I must say it is dragged out very often by the Deputy's party. It is advanced as if it represents tax uncollected. This of course is the total of assessments made by the Revenue——

I have pointed that out already.

——and it is usually made on people who have not made tax returns to encourage them to do so. Generally it is accepted that the assessments are set at a level far in excess of the probable liability so as to further the encouragement of returns. It is a figure which can be very misleading if presented in isolation and not explained clearly.

My Department at present are carrying out a comprehensive review of the operation and staffing of the Revenue in various areas. We have already identified areas where if changes were made staff might be redeployed to other areas with the possible beneficial improvement in revenue collection. We are in discussion with the Revenue Commissioners regarding this possible redeployment of staff to areas where they can be most effective.

I want to elicit from the Minister if he regards this as a matter of priority. I have mentioned already that the £3,500 million is an assessment.

A question, please, Deputy.

Does the Minister agree that the Revenue Commissioners have insufficient staff to go through these outstanding assessments to see how much is actually due? Is it true that 120 tax posts are unfilled? Does the Minister see this as a priority to bring revenue into the Exchequer so that taxes will not have to be paid by other people to make up for those who have not paid? Does the Minister see this as a priority to get around the embargo to fill the posts in the Revenue Commissioners' office?

There are sufficient people trying to find methods to get around the embargo without me joining that group and my task is to ensure they do not get around the embargo. The Deputy asked if I agreed that the Revenue Commissioners did not have sufficient staff. My belief is there are sufficient staff overall — 7,000 approximately — but I accept that there is a case to be made that within certain areas of Revenue additional staff might be redeployed from other areas with particular attention being paid to potential revenue outstanding. I take the essence of what the Deputy is saying. Perhaps he is suggesting that the staff in Revenue might be more effectively deployed? That is the subject of the review which my Department, in co-operation with the Revenue Commissioners, are carrying out at present and I hope we will be in a position to report considerable progress in the near future.